Supreme Court justices tackle Texas-Oklahoma water fight

WASHINGTON Tue Apr 23, 2013 3:04pm EDT

People line up for admission at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington October 1, 2012. REUTERS/Gary Cameron

People line up for admission at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington October 1, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Gary Cameron

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Supreme Court justices on Tuesday wrestled with the sensitive issue of whether a thirsty Texas water district has the right to access water across the Oklahoma state line.

The case arose under the Red River Compact, an agreement between Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas and Oklahoma that apportioned water within the Red River basin. The compact was approved by Congress in 1980.

The Tarrant Regional Water District, which provides water in the fast-growing Dallas-Forth Worth area, would like to access water in Oklahoma, but the Oklahoma Water Resources Board has refused. Oklahoma law restricts allocations of water out of state.

Texas as a whole has been facing a major drought.

Under the compact, the states have equal rights to water in the area in question - in a basin that straddles the Texas-Oklahoma border - but the water district and Oklahoma disagree over what exactly that means. The water district says it means Texas can seek access to 25 percent of the water in question, irrespective of the state line, as stated in the compact. Oklahoma disputes that interpretation.

The Obama administration intervened in the case in support of the Texas water district.

It was unclear based on Tuesday's hour-long oral argument how the court would rule, although several of the nine justices voiced concerns about the water district's argument.

One was Justice Samuel Alito, who told the water district's lawyer, Charles Rothfeld, that the image of Texas having the right to "go into Oklahoma" was troubling.

"I mean, it sounds like they are going to send in the National Guard or the Texas Rangers," Alito said.

Chief Justice John Roberts appeared more sympathetic to the water district, noting that the "whole point" of the compact is that the states all ceded some rights.

"Each state has to give up a little here or a little there to solve a problem," he said.

A decision is expected by the end of June.

The case is Tarrant Regional Water District v. Hermann, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 11-889.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Howard Goller and Cynthia Osterman)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
BoLee1971 wrote:
Without actually seeing the text of the document, from what I read here it seems pretty clear. If it says that the four states have equal access to the water, then Texas indeed should have 25% of it available to them. But these things often have lots of small print that the courts will have to go through before making the final call.

Apr 23, 2013 3:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
stormy123 wrote:
Im in Texas and this sounds more like poor planning to me. Even though here in Tarrant County we need the water, Im wondering why Texas has such crazy water districting whereby they scour the state for water and drain others resources at crazy times of the year, yet every time it rains i see all these dams releasing water down river?

Apr 23, 2013 3:49pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
MikeBee wrote:
Who would have thought that extreme weather caused by climate change would turn one red state against another? Or is this just the beginning of resource wars?

Apr 23, 2013 5:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.